Understanding Plagiarism &
Referencing
Learner Development Unit
Outline
• Plagiarism
• What it is
• Why it matters Why it matters
• Avoiding plagiarism •
•
•
•
Paraphrasing
Paraphrasing Summarising Reporting
Referencing • Turnitin
• What it is • What it does
What it does
• What the scores mean Thoughts & Feelings
• “Why does everyone keep telling me about this plagiarism thing? I still don’t get what they mean!”
they mean!
• “I hate the way people just go on and on
about
b it but
b they
h don’t
d ’ tell
ll me hhow to ddo it
properly!
properly!”
Thoughts & Feelings
• “I’m
“ ’ scared.
d It’s
t’ easier
i jjustt tto avoid
id
using any sources at all. That
That’ss what
I did at school anyway, and it was
fi there – I got good
fine
d grades!”
d
• “If
If I give
gi references
r f r n for
f r every
ry single
ing thing I read
r d
and write, will there be any room for me and my own
ideas?
d ? Wh
Where am "I” in allll this?”
h ?”
Thoughts & Feelings
• “Why
y do I need to use all these
sources and references anyway?!
The don
They
don’tt use
se them in some of
tthe
e magazines
agazi es I read!
rea Why
y aren't
are t
they accused of “plagiarising”?!
Thi isn’t
This
i ’ fair!”
f i !”
Thoughts & Feelings
• “Why
Why bother? It just makes
things even more difficult!
Writing’s already difficult and
boring as it is!
is!”
• “Why does Turnitin give me a
sscore
o fo
for pl
plagiarism
gi is even
v
when I’ve
I ve referenced
properly?!”
What is Plagiarism 1? • Using language exactly as it is used by someone else in books, articles etc?
someone else in books, articles etc?
• Using other people’s ideas or theories or “facts” or “knowledge” without referencing? • Paraphrasing / summarising what you read Paraphrasing / summarising what you read
without stating the source?
• ‘Close’ paraphrasing? What is Plagiarism 2? • Buying
Buying an essay from an essay‐writing an essay from an essay writing
service?
• Using a friend’s essay with his/her permission? i i ?
• Writing an assignment in collaboration with a Writing an assignment in collaboration with a
friend/s?
• Submitting writing from a previous assignment for a new assignment?
assignment for a new assignment? Grey areas … • “Patchwriting”
“Patchwriting”, i.e. joining together i e joining together
sentences from various different sources to form a paragraph
• This will be understood as plagiarism unless detailed references are provided
unless detailed references are provided at every stage and for each sentence / y g
/
extract Sources inside Sources • How
How will you deal with these?
will you deal with these?
–Honestly (i.e. indicate the genuine origin of your material (e.g. Smith 2003 in Johnson 2005)?
–Or strategically
g
y ((i.e. just cite the secondary j
y
source (e.g. Smith 2003))? (Dishonest – but it looks as if you’ve read the original
it looks as if you’ve read the original secondary source = ethos) Complicating Issues ... • Authority
Authority of texts of texts
(
g
/
/
• Fields (cf. e.g. Academia / Journalism / Literature)
• Genre (cf. e.g. Journal Article / Textbook / Encyclopaedia / School Essay / HE Essay)
Encyclopaedia / School Essay / HE Essay)
• Contexts (e.g. in the eyes of the law / at university / at work)
• Purposes of writer of writer
Why does it Matter? •
•
•
•
•
•
Intellectual property
Intellectual
property
Culture of HE in The UK
Theories of learning Individuality of thinking, writing, assignments It i ill l!
It is illegal! It matters in many areas of life
It matters in many areas of life
How we Learn at University
Your own [unique?] understanding of the topic
Entering a Conversation
Writing as “E t i
“Entering a Conversation” C
ti ”
• Intellectual [logos] Intellectual [logos]
– Location of your question / problem within its wider social / academic context
its wider social / academic context – Positioning of your research within the discipline ⇒ meaning; significance; relevance; purpose meaning; significance; relevance; purpose
• Social [ethos]
– Establishing “the right to speak”
E t bli hi “th i ht t
k”
– Establishing why someone should read your work • Rhetorical h
l
– General → Specific pattern for information [typically]
– Creation of “the thread”
What to Reference? • Di
Distinctive ideas ‘belonging’ to someone who ti ti id
‘b l
i ’t
h
originally proposed the idea as ‘fact’ / g
yp p
/
‘knowledge’
• Information/data from a particular source f
/d f
l
[ g
[e.g. statistical info, case studies, reports] ,
, p
]
• Verbatim phrases / chunks [i.e. quotes / quotations] • Non‐common
Non common knowledge [? issue knowledge [? issue – what qualifies what qualifies
as “common” / “non‐common” knowledge …?]
Why Reference? • To
To give yourself credibility
give yourself credibility [i.e. to establish [i e to establish
your right to participate] [ethos]
• To make yourself persuasive – giving evidence
i
in your arguments [logos]
t [l
]
• To give credit to the original author for the To give credit to the original author for the
original ideas [i.e. respect; face] • To give your readers clear and sufficient detail for them to locate idea/s for themselves
for them to locate idea/s for themselves
Why Reference? • What is “knowledge”? Wh t i “k
l d ”?
• What are What are “facts”?
facts ?
• Temporary ≠ permanent? • In‐flux ≠ stable?
• Knowledge as a Knowledge as a ‘knowledge
knowledge‐claim
claim’??
• Objectivity ≠ Inter‐subjective belief? ⇒ Beware simple thinking! ⇒ Beware dogma! Why Reference? • To
To deflect criticism of the idea/s from you on to deflect criticism of the idea/s from you on to
your source/s
• To avoid seeming to plagiarise
⇒ [avoiding] plagiarism is actually [avoiding] plagiarism is actually
an issue of face, credibility, persuasion, ,
y, p
,
understanding, interpretation & “
“ownership” hi ”
• And … it
And it’ss difficult … so … difficult so
Mechanics of P
Paraphrasing … h i
• Change the syntax [i.e. the word order]
• Change the word class
Ch
th
d l
[i
[i.e. verb ⇒
b
adjective; verb ⇒ noun; noun ⇒
adjective; verb ⇒
noun; noun ⇒ verb verb
etc]
• Use synonyms
Some Practice … • “I really like you, and I think you’re a “I
ll lik
d I thi k
’
great friend But ”
great friend. But …
think we’re
re going to have to let you going to have to let you
• “II think we
go”
Paraphrasing & Summarising • ⇒ Really therefore, it
Really therefore it’ss all about deep all about deep
understanding
• Understanding Vs remembering & repeating
?What ?What
?Why ?How ?Connections between ideas / authors
?Connections between ideas / authors ?Similarities ≠ differences ?Underpinnings The Realities of Paraphrasing/Summarising …
Paraphrasing/Summarising
• Genuine
Genuine understanding of the material understanding of the material
= biting; chewing; ruminating; digesting
• Blood; sweat; toil; more bloody sweat & toil; repeat ad nauseam t d
• In essence, if you can
In essence, if you can’tt understand the understand the
original material, it’s ?impossible? to paraphrase? h
?
In essence cf what someone says ≠ what
• In essence, cf. what someone says ≠ what someone is saying ⇒ aim for the latter
Interactive Nature of Reading
you
texts
responses
Thinking
Writing
Thinking
Writing
Re‐
thinking
Re‐
rethinking
Re‐
Re
writing
Or put in another way … • “To
To be accurate, write; to remember, be accurate, write; to remember,
write; to know thine own mind, write” •
(Tupper in Douglas, C. (1937) Forty Thousand Quotations Prose and Poetical. New York: Halcyon House, 1937.)
• I would add … • “to know thine
“to know thine own
own mind and other mind and other
p p
people’s minds, write”
,
Thinking …
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Finding things out
g
g
Working things out
Deciding
Solving
Justifying
Remembering
Planning
g g
Arguing
Identifying
Speculating
Calculating
Comparing
Deducing
Realising •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
implications p
Analysing
Summarising
Hypothesising
Evaluating
Sequencing
Ordering
Sortingg
Classifying
Grouping
Predicting
Concluding
Distinguishing
Noticing exceptions
• Noticing connections
g
• Realising underpinnings
• Noticing N ti i
assumptions
• Testingg
•
•
(Adapted from McGuinness, 1999)
McGuinness, C. (1999). From Thinking Skills to Thinking Classrooms: A Review and
Classrooms: A Review and Evaluation of Approaches for Developing Pupils' Thinking. Nottingham: DfEE Publications.
How do I as the writer come into my writing when I’m usually explaining other people’s ideas?
y p
g
p p
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Text organisation & presentation ARGUMENT
Analyses / balance of information Relationship/s with reported ‘knowledge’
Relationship/s with reader/s (e.g. being cautious)
Relationship/s with reader/s (e.g. being cautious)
Structuring of ideas & argument/s Linking & signalling language Avoiding Plagiarism? • W
Write notes in your own words [i.e. paraphrasing & it
t i
d [i
h i &
summarising]
• Be fanatical about keeping records of where you get your information from when making notes
your information from when making notes
• In your own writing, use a clear & consistent system of referencing [Harvard?]
f f
[
d ]
• Always provide a full list of references in your Always provide a full list of references in your
bibliography
• When in doubt –
Wh i d bt give a reference!!
i
f
!!
Academic Writing as a Jigsaw
Ji
‐ Piecing
Piecing it together it together
‐ Pieces of jigsaw are the notes you make from the literature you read [paraphrases, summaries, quotations, extracts,
quotations, extracts, words, data etc]
‐ A haphazard pile to start Ah h
d il
with
Academic Writing as a Jigsaw
Ji
‐ Tracking
Tracking down the information down the information
‐ One article may only have one tiny relevant thing in it e.g. half a sentence in 30 pages
Academic Writing as a Jigsaw
Ji
‐ Sometimes you know exactly what piece/s
exactly what piece/s you’re looking for
Academic Writing as a Jigsaw
Ji
‐ H
How / Do pieces fit together? You need to interpret /D i
fit t th ? Y
dt i t
t
relevance & worth using YOUR OWN CRITERIA
‐ Those criteria are not always pre‐determined –
frequently they are created by you your needs
frequently they are created by you, your needs, your argument, your direction/s
Academic Writing as a Jigsaw
Ji
‐ Sometimes
Sometimes there will be there will be ‘natural’
natural fits fits
between pieces. Sometimes not!
Academic Writing as a Jigsaw
Ji
‐ Sometimes
Sometimes structures are pre
structures are pre‐determined
determined e.g. when working within paradigms / authoritative areas e g Law
authoritative areas e.g. Law Academic Writing as a Jigsaw
Ji
‐ The
The same thing may appear different from different same thing may appear different from different
perspectives / in different paradigms / industries / settings / contexts / roles
settings / contexts / roles Academic Writing as a Jigsaw
Ji
‐ Hopefully you develop clarity in your own mind
Academic Writing as a Jigsaw
Ji
Academic Writing as a Jigsaw
Ji
‐ An incoherent paragraph / section ‐ A coherent
paragraph / section
Academic Writing as a Jigsaw
Ji
John’s ill “ ”
“...”
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
John s ill and won
John’s
won’tt be coming in today
John said he was unable to come as he was ill
John says he’s unable to come as he’s ill
John says he’s not coming in today
John claims he can’t come in due to illness
I hear John
John’ss ill and won
won’tt be coming in
I’m told John’s ill and won’t be in today
Apparently John can’t make it today
Due to illness, John can’t come in. So he says
“Codes fix relationships ...”
• A
As stated by Hall (1998: 32), “codes fix relationships t t d b H ll (1998 32) “ d fi l ti hi
between concepts and signs”
• According to Hall (1998: 32), “codes fix relationships between concepts and signs”
between concepts and signs
• As Hall (1998: 32) said, “codes fix relationships b
between concepts and signs”
d
”
• Hall (1998: 32) stated that Hall (1998: 32) stated that “codes
codes fix relationships fix relationships
between concepts and signs”
• Hall (1998: 32) claimed that “codes fix relationships H ll (1998 32) l i d th t “ d fi l ti hi
between concepts and signs”
“Codes fix relationships ...”
• Hall
Hall (1998: 32) states that (1998: 32) states that “codes
codes fix fix
relationships between concepts and signs”
• As Hall (1998: 32) states, “codes fix relationships between concepts and signs”
l ti hi b t
t
d i ”
• Hall (1998: 32) stated Hall (1998: 32) stated “codes
codes fix relationships fix relationships
between concepts and signs”
• “Codes fix relationships between concepts and signs” (Hall 1998: 32)
and signs
(Hall 1998: 32)
Reporting
•
S t ti Ch i
Syntactic Choices
1. Removed from grammar of sentence g
• “Codes fix relationships between concepts and signs” (Hall 1998: 32). i ” (H ll 1998 32)
2. As grammatical part of sentence:
g
p
• According to Hall (1998: 32), “codes fix...”
• As stated by Hall (1998: 32), “codes fix …”
A
d b H ll (1998 32) “ d fi ”
• Hall (1998: 32) states that “codes fix …” (
)
Reporting
• Choice of Reporting Verb Ch i
fR
ti V b
• Claim; state; prove; suggest; argue; etc
• What differences? What criteria? • Truth status
• Your interpretation of original writer Y
i t
t ti
f i i l it
‘motivation’ (e.g. Hall denies this ( g
however, pointing out …)
• Your purpose
Reporting
• Tense of Reporting Verb T
fR
ti V b
• Present Simple / Past Simple / Present Perfect – what criteria? • Relevance
• Focus
• Generality ≠ specificity
y p
y
• Truth status
• Your purpose
Reporting
Wh reporting
When
ti ...
•
•
•
•
•
•
You create different relationships between yourself and
the person who you report
You create different relationships between yourself and
the ‘knowledge’
g / ‘fact’ / claim which yyou report
p
Degrees of proximity ≠ distance
Humour / sarcasm / irony /criticism
Respect / harmony / allegiance
A very strong manifestation of “I” in language [but
without using the word “I”]
Language to Evaluate Sources •
•
•
•
•
Echoing …, … [main clause]
Echoing
[main clause]
Following …, … [main clause]
Following …, … [main clause] g
Deriving from …, … [main clause] Based on …, … [main clause] In a …, … [main clause] Language of Evaluation – Attitude Attit d
Surprisingly, …
•
Inevitably
Inevitably, ...
•
Surprisingly, ... p
gy
•
Most surprising of all, •
... •
• Conveniently, ...
Conveniently
•
• As might be expected, ...
•
•
•
•
Wisely, ...
Sagely
Sagely, ...
Sensibly, ... y
Quite rightly, ... Even worse, ...
Disturbingly
Disturbingly, ... Language of Evaluation – Style St l
• Quite frankly, ... • Strictly speaking, ... • More simply put / Put More simply put / Put • Technically speaking, Technically speaking
...
more simply, ... • Figuratively speaking, ... • In a word, ... In a word, ...
• In short, ... • Putting it bluntly, ... Language to S
Summarise Sources i S
• The essence of the argument (Emslie and Hunt 2009) is that
Hunt 2009) is that ...
In essence, Emslie and Hunt
and Hunt’ss (2009) (2009)
• In essence, Emslie
argument is that ... • Essentially, what Emslie and Hunt (2009) argue is that ... i th t
• At its heart, what Emslie
At its heart what Emslie and Hunt (2009) and Hunt (2009)
argue is that ...
Language of Reporting •
•
•
•
•
Argue Claim
Claim Suggest Suggest
Show
Demonstrate • SSee p.22ff on “Tutorial Resources” 22ff
“
i l
”
handout (available on Oasis+)
handout (available on Oasis+)
How do I as the writer come into my writing when I’m usually explaining other people’s ideas?
y p
g
p p
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
TText organisation & presentation t
i ti &
t ti
ARGUMENT
Analyses / balance of information R l i hi / i h
Relationship/s with reported ‘knowledge’
d ‘k
l d ’
Relationship/s with reader/s (e.g. being cautious)
p/
/ ( g
g
)
Structuring of ideas & argument/s Linking & signalling language Institutional Approaches
LR Guides
• LDU
LDU‐MUSU‐LR “Understanding Plagiarism & MUSU LR “U d t di Pl i i &
Referencing” drop‐in Workshops
• MUSU‐LDU‐LR One Stop Plagiarism Shop stalls in the Quad
the Quad • http://libguides.mdx.ac.uk/plagiarismreferencing
• http://libguides.mdx.ac.uk/content.php?pid=22023
8&sid 1828721
8&sid=1828721
• http://unihub.mdx.ac.uk/study/ldu/onlineresources
/i d
/index.aspx